[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Metapackage dependencies: "Depends" or "Recommends"?



On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 10:45:01AM -0700, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
> The only think it doesn't yet do is that if
> 
> - a is automatically installed
> - b is automatically installed
> - c is manually installed and depends on a|b
> 
> Either a or b can be removed. But I don't think apt* handled that either.

This example makes it quite obvious that your requirements are "keep
a minimal set of packages installed" while the requirement of libapt's
autoremove is "suggest only packages for removal which are completely
safe to remove".


An algorithm can't reasonably decide if C is using A or B (or both) to
provide one of its features (the one which is the reason for the
depends, so that must be a pretty important feature as C is so useless
without it that it is better removed).

Even if there is no configuration needed to use A or B, the usage
experience of iceweasel and w3m might be different, even if they are
both www-browser's.

Of course, a technically adapt user can decide which one is really
used/needed by C and/or revise his decision mistake later on by
reinstalling a package, but this is a maintenance cost – and a cost
libapt doesn't want to nor can force upon all its users.


Good thing that C isn't depending on 'apt | debfoster' for their ability
to remove unused dependencies as even if they have the same task, they
have totally different presets and target audiences…


Best regards

David Kalnischkies

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: